Weston Electrical Instrument Co. v. Stevens

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Weston Electrical Instrument Co. v. Stevens

130 F. 152, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4795

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedApril 2, 1904

StatusPublished

This text of 130 F. 152 (Weston Electrical Instrument Co. v. Stevens) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Weston Electrical Instrument Co. v. Stevens, 130 F. 152, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4795 (circtsdny 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

EACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

So far as the papers show, the only patent in this record which was not before Judge Wheeler in the suit against Jewell ([C. C.] 128 Fed. 939) is the Cauderay patent. It is not at all as near to the invention of the patent in suit as are some of the patents and publications which were before Judge Wheeler. The Despres-d’Arsonville publication, which was principally relied upon on argument of this motion, was considered by him. It is mentioned in his opinion. Upon this application his conclusions as to validity and construction should be followed. Without now making any decision as to the other claims, it is held that 8, 12, and 13 are valid, and infringed by defendant’s structure, which certainly is as close, if not closer, to the device of the patent than was the infringing structure in the Jewell Case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

EACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

So far as the papers show, the only patent in this record which was not before Judge Wheeler in the suit against Jewell ([C. C.] 128 Fed. 939) is the Cauderay patent. It is not at all as near to the invention of the patent in suit as are some of the patents and publications which were before Judge Wheeler. The Despres-d’Arsonville publication, which was principally relied upon on argument of this motion, was considered by him. It is mentioned in his opinion. Upon this application his conclusions as to validity and construction should be followed. Without now making any decision as to the other claims, it is held that 8, 12, and 13 are valid, and infringed by defendant’s structure, which certainly is as close, if not closer, to the device of the patent than was the infringing structure in the Jewell Case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 F. 152, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weston-electrical-instrument-co-v-stevens-circtsdny-1904.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack